June

Clive Fullagar · 12-13-2002, 01:02 AM

This is the next portrait that I would like to work on. It is a picture of my mother-in-law. The photograph is taken in natural light, with a thin white sheet over the window. I always "Photoshop" my pictures to give me an idea of composition and to clean up any noise in the background. This provides me with a digital sketch that I can then work from. The final painting will be 30" x 44". I would like your comments on overall composition as well as any anticipated problems you see me encountering.

Clive Fullagar · 12-13-2002, 01:10 AM

Here is a close-up of her face. Her choice was to put on lipstick which tends to make her lips dominantly red. I would really like to hear your views on whether to keep the lipstick. I must say I have never met her yet when she has not been wearing lipstick - and I see it as being very representative of who she is.

William Whitaker · 12-13-2002, 01:53 AM

Clive,

When you have done all you can from the photos, have her sit and paint from life.

She is much prettier in real life than she is in photos. Everybody is.

In life, her nostrils won't be so dark and her mouth will be softer.

William Whitaker · 12-13-2002, 01:58 AM

Keep it soft. Here is a portrait detail by the great Russian painter Kramskoy. Notice how wonderfully soft the mouth and nose are.

William Whitaker · 12-13-2002, 02:00 AM

You will also have trouble with her left hand, the one covered by the fingers of her right hand.

We have been brought up to believe in photographs, but forms like this seem "wrong" in a painting. I guarantee you will have trouble with that hand.

Bill

Mike McCarty · 12-13-2002, 11:57 AM

Clive,

I'll give you my dos pesos. I think the lady is a little hard to find in the composition for two reasons: first, the chair is very imposing and second, the broad scope of the composition.

I know these things can be to taste, but my taste goes for something like the following version. I've de-emphasized the arch of the chair arm on our right and darkened the chair on our left.

Once again this is just one guy's look.

Peggy Baumgaertner · 12-13-2002, 01:45 PM

Clive,

I would stick to a smaller format, head and shoulders or head and hands. I would not attempt to do a full body, especially with such casual dress. I am assuming that this is not a commission, where if you get paid enough money, you might take on something like this. That's a lot of painting on the wall for a very casual portrait.

I may get into hot water for this, but my advise would be to do many many heads. You could do six, eight heads in the amount of time it would take you to do a full length of this size. At this stage in your training, you really need to concentrate on nailing those heads. And the more you do, the better. You need hundreds of heads and miles of canvas to get good at this, and working out the composition in an overstuffed chair and docker shoes with white socks takes you away from that task.

(BTW, I've been looking at your Madamoiselle M. portrait, I just need some time to post....I'll do so later today)

Bill, love the "Unknown Woman" by Ivan Kramskoy. One of the greatest portraits in the world.

Peggy

Sharon Knettell · 12-13-2002, 01:46 PM

Clive, I have often over-rouged and lipsticked my subjects. Stuart, George Washington's painter did the same thing. It was a common 18th century practice. Somehow brighter lips and cheeks that would look gaudy in public, look just fine in a portrait. I think the bright pink lips give her sprightliness.

I like the whole figure in a large chair. It gives her a sense of fragility and makes for a more unusual composition. The hands don't bother me, they are very touching and have the right gesture for an older woman. I love her sneakers as well.

You have just enough of the dark orange to complement her sweater.

A large blank wall space, like you have, can work, though it can be tricky. Resist the urge to put a plant or florals there. Make sure the curtain edge does not go out at an angle. It could be brought in a tad or stay where it is, but it must be perfectly perpendicular. I like the simplicity, very contemporary and very Hockney. Actually David Hockney did some interesting portraits. He had a refreshingly unusual sense of composition. He sometimes placed seated figures in large blank spaces. Look him up.

Sincerely,

Clive Fullagar · 12-13-2002, 03:34 PM

What wonderfully diverse advice - it is always good to have choices. I think that I am going to do all of the above.

First, I think that I am going to do the full-figure composition - mainly for personal reasons. This photograph was taken shortly after June lost her husband and I really like the fragility of the pose that Sharon pointed out. Mike, I like your cropping idea but I think that it would take away from the sense of this woman being overwhelmed by the world.

Peggy, one thing that I am learning from you (and this may sound so self-evident) is the importance of the face in the portrait. I know that if the surroundings are not going to dominate I am going to have to give the face some enormous clout ("oomph" I think is the term you have used). But I must admit that there are a lot of personal reasons why I am painting this picture, so I will practice head-pieces on other subjects, or, better still, may just try a smaller head sketch as preparation for the larger work. I have really appreciated your feedack on my postings to this forum, especially as you do such wonderful work yourself.

Bill, thanks for your wise and experienced comments. I have an admission to make, when I joined this forum about a month ago I was truly unaware of the talent that existed on this forum. Having seen the work of some of its contributors I am truly honored and extremely respectful of their advice. I also think that soft is the way to go here and thank you for posting the Kramskoy portrait as a guide. With respect to the left hand, I will try and put it in more shadow although until I get there I do not know what will work. Thanks for the heads-up though.

Once again, thank you all for your advice - however it just means that I am going to be coming back for more.

Sharon Knettell · 12-14-2002, 11:24 AM

Clive, in looking at your wonderful painting of your son, I believe your approach to portraiture should be more adventurous and modern. Your natural style does not seem to fit in the 'classical' mode.

Check out this site on Fairfield Porter, http://www.artchive.com/artchive/P/porter.html#images

He is one of my favorite painters. His use of color was phenomenal. He used broad areas of bright color to define his space. Though not the most skillful of draughtsmen he nevertheless created portraits of powerful simplicity. Van Gogh was not that skillful either, but I would rather have one of his iris paintings than a roomful of Bouguereaus.

The painting "The Mirror" of his daughter, reminds me of your son's picture.

As to the size of your painting, I go by head size. I like to use an 8" head and base the size on that. You could probably get away with a 7" head on this one, but I wouldn't go any smaller. Work out your exact size on tracing paper and get some stretchers made.You can get a smaller drawing blown up at a place that does work for architects. Do not try to fit this picture into readymade stretchers. Chris Polsen of Twin Brooks Pro Stretchers will make you a set to your precise measurements. He's fast, reasonable and they are beautiful. His phone number is 1 800 856-1567.

I hope this helps. Sincerely,